Ultragain Pro question

D

Deen

New member
I've been intersted in the Ultragain Pro lately.
I've read the PDF manual at Behringer's sight.
It said something like you had to turn off all the other
features, EQ's etc. except the Output control when
using the 2200 as Direct Box. Isn't it possible or
even better to use the EQ's when Direct recording Bass
or Guitar for instance? I'm confused. Wouldn't it be a
waste of having the EQ off?

Thanks.
 
For maximum sonic benefit, I'd suggest going a step further by simply turning the power off. :D


(would really cut down on any self-noise)
 
I couldn't help but laugh after reading your post Chessrock.
But I was actually expecting another answer. Actually I
was baiting DOT from the Listening Sessions to answer this.
Since he's seems to be the only one who's even dared to recommend the 2200. But it's always a pleasure running into you and Cessparov. OOOPs....
 
If it is anything like the Ultravoice pro then the EQ may be "Voice Optimized" and you may want to tweak different frequencies when recording bass.

Also things like a de esser my may not be a lot of use when recording bass !!!
 
You can't really use the ultragain as a guitar or bass DI, because it only has low impedance inputs. I mean you can use it, but it won't sound good; there will be severe treble roll off. You should only use it for keyboards and other low impedance sources that usually don't need a DI anyway.
 
Huh?

I was using an Ultragain 2200 a few years back before I could afford "hi-end" and I used it often as a bass DI, no problems. I used it for everything: vocals, stereo keys, acoustic guitars, etc, etc. I never had a problem with it being too noisy either :) Sure, I'll admit it's not in the same ballpark as my Avalon and Manley pres, but for the home recordists on a budget, the Behringer stuff more ofetn than not a good value choice, in fact, quite often a damn good buy, certainly hard to beat in a quality VS price ratio.

Deen, there's a lot of gear snobs on this board....what's worse is there's a lot of gear snobs here that own only mostly budget gear too. I'm surprised that companies like Behinger are still in business after this long time, seeing that apparently absolutely no-one buys or uses their gear (especially if you listen to some of the fairy tales that get tossed around on this forum) :rolleyes:

Dingo

P.S. The Behringer has both XLR and phono line inputs.
 
Nice to have you guys respond!

Dr. Simon,

I'm thinking if the 2200 is voice optimized, perhaps
it could be of some use to my Bass tracks, because
the ones I've recorded always lack highs. Perhaps
the EQ can compensate, I'm not sure.

Dot,

I'm seriously considering the 2200 now that you've recommended it. I listened to the "sessions" and liked the 2200 better than the
Audio Buddy which I found a bit muddy. The EQ is great for guys l
on a budget like me. Great site you've got!

Rossi,

I'm not sure why Behringer would say the 2200 does DI
functionality when you say it isn't . Perhaps it's best to
get a real Box like a DI 100? Don't you think?
 
Sir Dingo,

To tell you the truth I myself shyed from asking the
Behriee questions because I didn't want to get ganged up upon.
You're response is quite refreshing to my ears. I'm not saying
People will be replacing their Neve's with 2200's but for someone
who will never even see the likes of an Avalon or Manley it's
probably a good thing to have these things around.


Thanks for the reply.
 
Deen it sounds like you made your mind up before you posted anyway, somtimes we have to find out for ourselves.

Behringer is aimed for the budget market so you can expect that kind of performance from them, you dont need people on this site to tell you what you want to hear, just talk to the shop assistant!
 
MiXit-G said:
Deen it sounds like you made your mind up before you posted anyway, somtimes we have to find out for ourselves.

Behringer is aimed for the budget market so you can expect that kind of performance from them, you dont need people on this site to tell you what you want to hear, just talk to the shop assistant!
Click to expand...

:mad: This is exactly the sort of gear snobbery I'm talking about. We see it all too often here. And not only that, but while choosing not to answer the question or be helpful in any way, MixIt-G decided to be rude about it too...





No, on second thoughts, MixIt-G is right.......all you people who don't have a lot of cash to spend, or are on a budget, please do not buy budget gear, OK? Go steal a Manley or something instead.

And please avoid buying equipment from these manufacturers:

Studio Projects
Marshall Electronics
ART
Behringer
PreSonus
Zoom
Alesis
FMR Audio
Digitech, etc, etc.

Thy only make gear "aimed at the budget market so you can expect that kind of performance from them". And because these manufacturers make products aimed at the budget market, they must be automatically shit...

:rolleyes:
 
Cool Deen,

I don’t know if the ultra gain has the “Voice optimized EQ” but hell if it sound good, go for it ! Also Voice optimized doesn’t mean it cant do it, it just means the eq knobs have funny names !


Me I have a couple of Behringer Patch bays and a Behringer headphone amp, all are totally cool ! I have also got rid of a lot of Behringer kit recently (Ultravoice pro, compressor, expander) and all did there job well for very little cash. The Ultravoice pro was not an Avalon or a Focusrite but hell for 100 bucks I wouldn’t expect it to be !

In terms of cash spent vs improvement in sound , the Ultravoice pro was one of the best investments I have made to date. If you can get a good one second hand of eBay…well !!! 70 bucks…..

Good luck mate
S
 
Sorry if i was a little brash Deen, what can i say... go for it!, just sounded like you needed assurance.

I was tempted to buy one until i listened to it.

As for Sir Drongo, i did'nt say anything was shit and you'll find that some of those companies carry gear with a hefty tag and peform very well indeed.
 
Hey thanks again for the added responses,

Actually I was leaning towards the DMP3. But it's about 200
bucks or less. It's a bit too expensive. Audio Buddy was also
attractive until I ran into some of you who liked the 2200
for what it is. Actually I was really confused. And I really do need you guys for assurance. In my country the options are so limited,
in fact there is no M-audio, Joe meek, Studio Projects and
most of the brands Sir Dinggo mentioned. Only Behringer
for budget gear and the rest is Higher end like Shure, AT
Sennheiser, Mackie etc.So I'm kinda nervous about purchases.
There is the internet store Music 123, but if I get a broken
unit I'm doomed. ( Philippines )


But thanks for the responses. At least if I do get the Behringer,
I know what to expect. I just wanted to hear from guys that
do like it for what it is.
 
I have the ultragain pro from Behringer. I'm no gear snob. It's two channels for 100$. It's night and day better than the pres on my mackie 1202. This mackie was made before the VLZ series so I don't know if that is any better or not. It does not hold a candle to my ART Tube Channel which was about 300$ more.

I think that alot of people on this bbs blarg on about whatever the latest gear is too. Some of them are pretty smart though and finding which cheap gear is any good is always a challenge.

You can turn the eq off on my Behringer and it has XLR and TRS, microphone and line level inputs. I think that if you want phantom power you have to run XLR on that unit.
 
Deen, the Ultragain 2200 Pro does have DI functionality; you can run an unsymmetric line source into the Behringer and get a symmetric signal at the output. *But* if you take a look at the spec sheet, you'll find that the input impedance of the Line input (there is no additional Hi-Z input) is rated at 60 k. Which is a bit more than most line inputs, but still not high enough to use it as a (good sounding) instrument input. An instrument input ought to be in the vincinity of 1 mega ohms or there will be some treble roll off. Depending on your tastes the Ultragain's 60 k line input may or may not sound okay for bass DI purposes. Most certainly you won't like it on Guitar. What I just said applies to passive instruments. If you have a guitar or bass with active electronics, a 60 K input will be fine.

BTW: The new 50 bucks ultra cheapo Ultragain 100 has a *real* instrument input @ 5 mega ohms.
 
An addendum ...

I don't like the behringer patch panel because it is not balanced. Sure the switches are cool for normal half normal and what not and you don't have to have a screwdriver to change the patches and what not but ... if it ain't balanced I believe you are screwing your headroom.

OK. Now I am done.
 
MiXit-G said:
[B}
As for Sir Drongo, i did'nt say anything was shit and you'll find that some of those companies carry gear with a hefty tag and peform very well indeed. [/B]
Click to expand...

Hefty price tag??? You are joking, right? :confused: Please tell me more about these hefty price tags from the companies I listed. Most of these companies sell purely budget gear aimed at the home hobbyist recorder market.

Secondly, I guess you missed the sarcasm in my reply. You implied that budget gear can only give a budget perfromance, whilst giving Behringer stuff a sly back-hander. I disagree. I was trying to point out that sometimes inexpensive, budget equipment (especially from the companies I mentioned) can produce outstanding results in a price/quality comparison.
 
I used the 2200 for a while. The EQ really is the best part about it - although it is not very flexible, it does sound pretty cool. The preamps overall are kind of muddy, but for the price its really not too bad. I'd say they are about as good as the pres in my old alesis studio 24 mixer FWIW. The DI does not work very well for bass or any other high impedence source like other have said. When I tried to use it, I had to run through something else first, like a thpedal or e mixer to bring the level up.
 
I get an even clearer picture now.

The 2200 is a decent 2 channel pre for the price.
EQ is usable. AS DI might be weak depending on taste.
Probably needs a booster on the front end to compensate for
treble roll-off. You've all been helpful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top